[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140907114705.GA10470@abel-laptop>
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2014 14:47:13 +0300
From: Abel Vesa <abelvesa@...il.com>
To: alex.shi@...el.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
peterz@...radead.org, pjt@...gle.com, efault@....de,
rjw@...ysocki.net, morten.rasmussen@....com,
svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, arjan@...ux.intel.com, mingo@...nel.org,
preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, markgross@...gnar.org,
corbet@....net, catalin.marinas@....com, sundar.iyer@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mike.turquette@...aro.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
dietmar.eggemann@....com
Subject: Power Scheduler Design
For a while now, I've started studying the power aware scheduling problem.
And like many other rookies out there I took all the lkml mails related
and read them all (well, almost all) and I saw that there are some
debating on the implementation.I even look over the implementation
proposed of Preeti U Murthy. I also worked (just for fun) for a while on
some ideas of my own (nothing worth sharing, yet) but I have problem
understanding the design requirements. Here is one.
Some of you (even Ingo) said that the scheduler should be the one to
manage the cpu P/C states. In this case the governors of the cpuidle and
cpufreq would not make any sense anymore. Does that mean they will not
be a part of this scheduling solution anymore?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists